Mechanical characteristics of the bone–graft–cement interface after impaction allografting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impaction allografting is an attractive procedure for the treatment of failed total hip replacements. The graft-cement-host bone interface after impaction allografting has not been characterized, although it is a potential site of subsidence for this type of revision total hip reconstruction. In six human cadaveric femurs, the cancellous bone was removed proximally and local diaphyseal lytic defects were simulated. After the impaction grafting procedure, the specimens were sectioned in 6 mm transverse sections and push-out tests were performed. From the adjacent sections the percentage cement contact of the PMMA cement with the endosteal bone surface was determined. The host bone interface mechanical properties varied significantly along the femur largely due to different interface morphologies. The apparent host bone interface shear strength was highest around the lesser trochanter and lowest around the tip of the stem. A significant positive correlation was found between the percentage cement contact and the apparent host bone interface shear strength (r2 = 0.52). The sections failed in 69% of the cases through a pure host bone interface failure without cement or allograft failure, 19% failed with local cement failure, and 12% with a local allograft failure. The apparent host bone interface strength was on average 89% lower than values reported for primary total hip replacements and were similar to cemented revisions proximally and lower distally. This study showed that cement penetration to the endosteal surface enhanced the host bone-graft interface.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".